[Libre-soc-bugs] [Bug 1169] Add ELF and mmap support to ISACaller -- no dynamic linking

[bugzilla-daemon at libre-soc.org]

https://bugs.libre-soc.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1169

--- Comment #23 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl at lkcl.net> ---
(In reply to Jacob Lifshay from comment #22)
> (In reply to Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton from comment #21)
> > (In reply to Jacob Lifshay from comment #19)
> > 
> > > Oh, i just thought of this while writing this comment, since it tracks page
> > > permissions for safety reasons (so python doesn't segfault),
> > 
> > this was NOT part of the scope of work.
> 
> page permissions for safety reasons were already added in bug #1173, because
> if we mmap a file as read-only (remember we're calling mmap on the host to
> replace part of the mmap.mmap block of memory), we need to not try to write
> to that memory, otherwise python *will* segfault

*great*! not our problem!

 instead of properly
> reporting a test error, majorly messing up all other test cases that that
> pytest worker is trying to run.

so what?

>  therefore I think this is necessary.

why am i only just learning that you have MASSIVELY increased the
scope and not even told me or consulted me?

> > 
> > you did not seek authorization to change the scope or priority of this work!
> 
> I did, I was told (comment #6) that I needed to increase the scope so I
> could use up more of the EUR 6000

no, we get *exactly the same money* even if the scopevs increased!
come on for god's sake jacob GET A GRIP. we are UNDER TIME PRESSURE

> > that it is acceptable to massively increase the scope of work.
> 
> I asked andrey to check the increased scope, he said it looks fine. 

that's because he DOES NOT KNOW THE CONSEQUENCES because he has not
been properly trained and DID NT CONSULT ME.

> I do think ELF needs to be higher priority since the grant *is expiring
> soon*, iirc david said we should try to finish everything off by dec and
> that doesn't leave much time.

and that means GETTING IT DONE FAST by NOT INCREASING THE DAMN SCOPE

andrey you MUST NOT authorize jacob to increase work scope
without a FULL REVIEW which you yourself have not been properly
trained in and are not authorized to make decisions on without
consulting me.

both of you should have followed the "time and budget review" process
and GOT ME TO CHECK IT.

i am getting seriously pissed off that you are threatening our promise
to NLnet that the work will be 100% completed.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.